michaelb wrote:"Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, [...] favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest."

Pabongkha abandons the Dharma.

Bullshit !

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

Caz wrote:But that reflects badly on them not on whoever's speech they justify their delusions with.

Really? So if I said: "Buddha told me for you to kill that guy over there" and you, due to your delusion (ie believeing I am correct), went over there and killed the guy then I bear no responsibility? I'm not talking about karmic consequences here, just plain old responsibility.

If someone can point out to me where he said to burn down Monasteries and desecrate statues...

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

Tom wrote:Let me balance my above comments with: while philosophical disputes and wild assertions are to be expected, the destruction of monasteries in the name of Pabongkha, which did happen, is totally unacceptable and absolutely tragic.

Its one thing to destroy a monastery in someone's name...There are many extremists among students of all sects even today, Why I recently heard to the story of one old monk who was left to wallow in the mud for 10 minutes (for reasons better left unsaid) it appears the passers by ( Monks ) forgot their Bodhisattva vows in the name of someone of the other.

But that reflects badly on them not on whoever's speech they justify their delusions with.

Agreed... that is why I am interested in reading these damning documents.

Same here. I am reminded of a quote from Kyabje Zong Rinpoche.

Kyabje Phabongka was also an emanation of Heruka Chakrasamvara, but degeneration of the times and jealousy of ordinary beings have made it difficult to become aware of his tremendous qualities. There are many biographies of Kyabje Phabongka that make his realized qualities very clear.

Im of the opinion many of the negativities attributed to him are fictitious or the works of mistaken cognition. It has not been unknown for people to make later additions to source material for some perverse reason or another.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

Hey Caz, how can you reconcile your quote form LPYH with the letter MichaelB posted?

Reading through Phabongka's text, I've come across something about giving up Nyingma yidams when one practices Geluk yidams....he uses the example of Khyungpo Naljor, who first practiced Bon, then Nyingma, etc.....I'm still parsing it out.....back of folio 11, if anyone's interested....

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

conebeckham wrote:Hey Caz, how can you reconcile your quote form LPYH with the letter MichaelB posted?

these days the views of all Sakyas, Kagyus, Nyingmas and so on are erroneous. They are not even Svatantra or Cittamatra, let alone the view of Prasanga Madhyamaka – meditating only the nihilist view like tirthikas and Hashang. If one upholds the nihilist view, the result is nothing other than going to Avichi hell. Since they can't recognize subtle lethargy, even their meditation is defective.

One theory could be that Phabongkha Rinpoche respected the early Sakya, Kagyu, and Nyingma sects but felt that they had degenerated over time while the Gelug alone remained faithful to their founding principles. This theory would explain his habit of quoting Milarepa, Lord Drikungpa and others. It would also explain his statement that Padmasambhava and Tsongkhapa are the same person. In short, he respected the other sects in an abstract sense, but not their modern forms.

Equanimity is the ground. Love is the moisture. Compassion is the seed. Bodhicitta is the result.

"All memories and thoughts are the union of emptiness and knowing, the Mind.Without attachment, self-liberating, like a snake in a knot.Through the qualities of meditating in that way,Mental obscurations are purified and the dharmakaya is attained."

conebeckham wrote:Hey Caz, how can you reconcile your quote form LPYH with the letter MichaelB posted?

Reading through Phabongka's text, I've come across something about giving up Nyingma yidams when one practices Geluk yidams....he uses the example of Khyungpo Naljor, who first practiced Bon, then Nyingma, etc.....I'm still parsing it out.....back of folio 11, if anyone's interested....

Fairly easily Cone, There is advice for general audience and advice for specific people. Although this type of letter doesn't come as a great shock to me Lama's have written far worse.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

conebeckham wrote:Hey Caz, how can you reconcile your quote form LPYH with the letter MichaelB posted?

these days the views of all Sakyas, Kagyus, Nyingmas and so on are erroneous. They are not even Svatantra or Cittamatra, let alone the view of Prasanga Madhyamaka – meditating only the nihilist view like tirthikas and Hashang. If one upholds the nihilist view, the result is nothing other than going to Avichi hell. Since they can't recognize subtle lethargy, even their meditation is defective.

One theory could be that Phabongkha Rinpoche respected the early Sakya, Kagyu, and Nyingma sects but felt that they had degenerated over time while the Gelug alone remained faithful to their founding principles. This theory would explain his habit of quoting Milarepa, Lord Drikungpa and others. It would also explain his statement that Padmasambhava and Tsongkhapa are the same person. In short, he respected the other sects in an abstract sense, but not their modern forms.

This makes sense.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

If it was a private letter it would be odd for his students ton include it in his Sungbum/collected works.

Caz there are many books for learning Tibetan available. The first step is to learn the alphabet. Learntibetan.net has good resources for this. Then you have to decide if you are interested in modern spoken or classical written Tibetan. For texts the latter is what you need. There are too many books to mention but I like Geshe Sopa's Lectures in Tibetan religious culture, it is written with some colloquial mixed in but the second half is all about the Gelug Lam Rim. Also, all the essential terminology is presented in each chapter.

I really encourage you to try to get even a basic reading level, then you can use the Translation tool and Illuminator to piece together sentences yourself. Through practice, year byyear, it will get easier. Investing an hour a day is enough to get to the point of being able to punch things into the dictionary relatively quickly.

Do this while you are still young. And if anyone discourages you, maybe they just don't want you to know something they don't know. Knowledge empowers you to make your own opinions and if they disagree with mine that is fine. I just want you to have the tools to explore those opinions fully. My only agenda is to encourage you to learn

In order to ensure my mind never comes under the power of the self-cherishing attitude,I must obtain control over my own mind. Therefore, amongst all empowerments, the empowerment that gives me control over my mind is the best,and I have received the most profound empowerment with this teaching.-Atisha Dipamkarabrtsal ba'i bkhra drin

JKhedrup wrote:If it was a private letter it would be odd for his students ton include it in his Sungbum/collected works.

Caz there are many books for learning Tibetan available. The first step is to learn the alphabet. Learntibetan.net has good resources for this. Then you have to decide if you are interested in modern spoken or classical written Tibetan. For texts the latter is what you need. There are too many books to mention but I like Geshe Sopa's Lectures in Tibetan religious culture, it is written with some colloquial mixed in but the second half is all about the Gelug Lam Rim. Also, all the essential terminology is presented in each chapter.

I really encourage you to try to get even a basic reading level, then you can use the Translation tool and Illuminator to piece together sentences yourself. Through practice, year byyear, it will get easier. Investing an hour a day is enough to get to the point of being able to punch things into the dictionary relatively quickly.

Do this while you are still young. And if anyone discourages you, maybe they just don't want you to know something they don't know. Knowledge empowers you to make your own opinions and if they disagree with mine that is fine. I just want you to have the tools to explore those opinions fully. My only agenda is to encourage you to learn

Thanks Ven Khedrup I will look into it.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

conebeckham wrote:Hey Caz, how can you reconcile your quote form LPYH with the letter MichaelB posted?...

Fairly easily Cone, There is advice for general audience and advice for specific people. Although this type of letter doesn't come as a great shock to me Lama's have written far worse.

So, your position is that your signature quote is for a "general audience," while Michaelb's post is addressed to a specific individual who needed to hear that everyone but Gelukpas were going to fail?

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

conebeckham wrote:Hey Caz, how can you reconcile your quote form LPYH with the letter MichaelB posted?...

Fairly easily Cone, There is advice for general audience and advice for specific people. Although this type of letter doesn't come as a great shock to me Lama's have written far worse.

So, your position is that your signature quote is for a "general audience," while Michaelb's post is addressed to a specific individual who needed to hear that everyone but Gelukpas were going to fail?

Pretty much

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

So, is there anything that could possibly be in any of Phabongkha's writings that would lead you to believe that he was sectarian, short of explicit instructions to others to actually destroy monasteries, or worse? Or are these "polemics" as you term them merely specific instructions, skillful means geared towards individuals only?

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

conebeckham wrote:So, is there anything that could possibly be in any of Phabongkha's writings that would lead you to believe that he was sectarian, short of explicit instructions to others to actually destroy monasteries, or worse? Or are these "polemics" as you term them merely specific instructions, skillful means geared towards individuals only?

Yes nothing short of direct commands to destroy monasteries and worse and even then I would still view him purely

Im inclined to think Je Pabongkha used a variety of skilful means to help others, my lineage Guru's make it very clear he is the same nature as Buddha Heruka and its not uncommon for one to act in contradiction of ordinary appearance if there is a greater benefit that arises from it in the future.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

conebeckham wrote:So, is there anything that could possibly be in any of Phabongkha's writings that would lead you to believe that he was sectarian, short of explicit instructions to others to actually destroy monasteries, or worse? Or are these "polemics" as you term them merely specific instructions, skillful means geared towards individuals only?

David N. Kay, in the book Tibetan Buddhism and Zen in Britain, claims that Pabonka's sectarianism was extraordinarily severe, and came in response to the Rime movement. Specifically, Kay claims Pabonka advocated the destruction of artifacts associated with Guru Rinpoche, and that such relics were destroyed, to cite one instance.

Has anyone plausibly rebutted these claims? By "plausible" I'm asking for a counterargument that is both reasonable and informed by evidence. Not this:

Caz wrote:Bullshit !

Need help getting on retreat? Want to support others in practice? Pay the Dana for Dharma forum a visit...

conebeckham wrote:So, is there anything that could possibly be in any of Phabongkha's writings that would lead you to believe that he was sectarian, short of explicit instructions to others to actually destroy monasteries, or worse? Or are these "polemics" as you term them merely specific instructions, skillful means geared towards individuals only?

Yes nothing short of direct commands to destroy monasteries and worse and even then I would still view him purely :.

Well, then..

On reflection, I've decided not to spend any further time weeding through the pages in an attempt to translate his sectarian statements and advice. They are there, I can assure you, but there's ample evidence, even in this thread, that any such statements can be defended by Pahabongkha's supporters--though I have to say that Caz's statement is more extreme than many would care to endorse. Such is the case in Tibetan politics and society--the "religious" affirmation is trotted out to support acts of power, often retrospectively......and so it goes, even into the 21st Century, and even into Western society and culture, and by an organization (NKT) that proposes to be non-(or even anti-) political and "trans-Tibetan." The irony is immense!

There is no limit to the things we will believe.

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

indeed, Cone. Any discussion on this issue is pointless, unless we use it as way of reflecting on our own responses to things that challenge us. When people identify themselves strongly with a position so that any contradiction of that position is seen as a personal attack, debate becomes pointless. There is no answer to blind faith. I will bail out here, too.

Before I do, I will post a translation of a couple of Pabongkha's letters to Lui Chuntang, so people at least understand a little why non-Gelugpas draw such exception to Pabongkha. As for the incidents of destroying Guru Rinpoche statues, Nyingma artifacts and forcibly convertiing Nyingma gompas in Chamdo and Kham, there are many accounts that predate any of the current difficult issues that the Gelug tradition has had to go through. Even Phabongkha wouldn't have been stupid enough to actually write it down.

"A CASE TO STUDYBy Tenzin Ragyal

The office ofHis Holiness the Dalai LamaDharamsala, H.P. INDIA[...]With regard to Phabongkha's primary motivation, his outlook towardsother religious traditions and his objectives for starting thismovement, they are all clearly inscribed in a letter that he sent tothe then Chinese military general Lui Chun Tang of the Sichuanprovince of China. This letter could be found on page 451, 456 inthe "Cha" section of Phabongkha's volumes on "Miscellaneous Works".For your convenience I have attached here copies of that letter inits English translation. If you study them you will be able tounderstand the core of the matter without any further explanations.It is in everybody's interest to take a strong and appropriate standand not to remain indifferent on the activities of Phabongkha'sfollowers and their cult groups and leaders like, e.g. NKT leaderGeshe (self-styled) Kelsang Gyatso in England, Serkong Thritrul inTaiwan, Gangchen Lama in Italy, Drakgom Tulku in Nepal, Dema Gonsarin Tibet, Gonsar Rin-poche in Swiss and Dorjee Shugden Society inIndia and Nepal etc.

The primary objective in providing this information is not to digout what has happened in the past. It is to draw attention to thefact that even today, in this period of global religious harmony,some short-sighted and narrow-minded people and groups are activelyadopting the path of fanaticism and religious intolerance. It is atask and responsibility of all of us to strongly discourage and actagainst such forms of religious intolerance and fanaticism.

Tenzin RagyalDharamsala, H.P. INDIA

1) A letter (Phabongkha) sent to the Chinese General, Lu Chu Tang in the Earth Tibet Year

In these days most of the Emperors and kings misperceive the barbaric religion as the best religion and have turned their backsagainst the nectar of the Buddha's teaching and opened the gate widetowards the lower realm for themselves and as well as theirsubjects. At such a time as a great leader and also because of yourstrong prayers and merits, you have respected only ManjughoshTsongkhapa's teaching lineage, which is the core of the Buddha'steachings, and put it on the crown of your head and held it firm atyour heart. You have thus spread and propagated the unsulliedteaching in many provinces in-cluding your own and have sown theseed of the path of liberation. I am grateful to you and the more Ireflect the more my mind is flooded with rejoice and admiration likethe waves of oceans touching the sky. Thank you very much.Still on this earth many other faiths like Hinduism, Christianity,Islam, Kongtse, (Confucianism ), Bon (ancient native Tibetanreligion) etc. flourish and each of them claims their own system asthe best. However, except in the teaching of the Buddha, all theothers do not have the path to liberation. They do not even havethe potential to abandon even one type of afflictive emotions.Even if they practice and uphold their faith in great hardship for along time, it will simply open the gate of the lower realm and nopositive result will be achieved at all from them. It is only adeceptive word showing what is not a path as a path.

Contrarily in the case of the Buddha's teaching, it easily bestowsthe "State of Liberation and Omniscience", closes the door ofrebirth in samsara and lower realms and it is possible to eradicatecompletely the 84,000 classes of afflictive emotions and theirpropensities. In this teaching, without requiring much hardship,one can travel from a peaceful path to a peaceful fruit. Since thistrue teaching is always non-deceptive we should endeavour to makeour life meaningful from a long term perspective and follow only theteaching of the Buddha. Although this teaching has four tenets, itis only the Prasangika Madhyamika which realises the unmistakenemptiness, which is free from the abyss of permanence and nihilism,and which is the ultimate and exact intention of the Buddha.

Although in the land of Tibet there are many different tenets likethat of Nyingma, Kugyu, Sakya, Gelugpa and so forth it is only theGelug School which establishes the unmistaken view of emptiness andthe Prasangika Madhyamika system which is the philosophy ofNagarjuna. It is not only the philosophical view but also in termsof meditation it is the perfect meditation devoid of laxity andtorpor. As for its behaviour it is again pure as it is practiced inaccordance with the vinaya teachings. Thus it is only the GelugSchool which knows how to adopt the three: the view, the meditation,the behaviour and in fact the complete teaching of the Buddha as oneintegrated practice in the form of the stages of the path toenlightenment. Thus this system of teaching of Tsongkhapa is theheart essence of the Buddha's teaching and is therefore like apinnacle of the victorious banner. As such to uphold this teachingby oneself and to disseminate it to others is the best and far-reaching Boddhisattva way of practice. As a great leader you havedone the best to spread this teaching in the province of China justas you have done in the past. And also in the regions of Kham youhave restored and further developed the teachings through variousmeans. I will be grateful for your continuous noble Boddhisattvaconduct of upholding the responsibility of the Gelug School.

1. Again a letter is sent to Lu Chu Tang in the Earth RabbitYear

Honest expression of the General presentation of Inner and OuterTenets of the World.

In general there are many religions in this world. Every followerthinks that his own faith is the best. However, if we honestlyexamine, Christianity and Islam are barbarism and therefore are theworst and there is no other religion worse than these. The non-Buddhist systems like that of Kapila and Sankhya are slightly betterthan the aforementioned faiths but they do not have the path toliberation. They may undertake great hardships like self-immolationand jumping upon a trident but there is no path to liberation. Itopens the gate to the lower realm. The so-called Bonpo is also notat all different from the other non-Buddhist faiths. Far fromachieving liberation it opens the door of the lower realm. SinceConfucianism is also not the teaching of the Buddha it simply givestemporary happiness but not liberation. As all these systems areopposite to the Buddha's teachings, leave aside achievingBuddhahood, they do not at all have the path to liberation. Onecannot show even a single example of one who has achieved liberationafter having practiced these faiths. Without exception most of themfall into the unfathomable lower realms. It is only Buddhism whichis the path of liberation. Even in Buddhism, the compassionateBuddha Shakyamuni knew that if the profound and ultimate truth ofemptiness is taught right at the outset, it would not be understoodby the followers. Just as children are gradually taught, startingfrom the alphabet, in the same way at first easily understandableteachings are taught. Therefore he first taught the VaibhashikaTenet System which explains grosser meanings of selflessness ofpersons. After that he taught the Sautantrika Tenet System which ismore profound than the previous one. Then he taught the Mind OnlySchool, which is again more profound and which teaches the grosserselflessness of phenomena. It is this school which Thangsen Lamapropagated in China. After that he taught the Madhyamika TenetSystem which explains the subtle selflessness, the ultimate view.Here also we have Indian Acharya/Masters Bhavaviveka;Shantarakshita, who even though they have entered the Madhyamikaphilosophy could not fathom the meaning of very subtle emptiness,the ultimate intention of the Buddha. Thus they are mid-dlingMadhyamikas and they are known as the Svatantrika Madhyamikas.

And we also have Indian Acharyas like Buddhapalita and Chandrakirtiwho had unmistakenly fathomed and realised the ultimate intention ofthe Buddha, which was trail-blazed by Nagarjuna, and they are calledPrasangika Madhyamikas. Regarding the path of liberation andBuddhahood, there are two parts: wisdom and method. All those tenetsystems below the Svatantrikas have found the unmistaken path of themethod but have failed to realise the ultimate view which is the wis-dom aspect, and therefore they have not realised the ultimateemptiness but just a facsimile. Hence it is only the PrasangikaMadhyamika System which realises the unmistaken subtle emptiness,the ultimate thought of the Buddha.

There is not even a single individual who has realised the subtleemp-tiness without entering into the Prasangika System. In theabsence of this realisation it is not possible to attainenlightenment. Therefore this Prasangika Madhyamika System, thesystem of Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti is the best, the supreme andthe peak among the four Buddhist Tenet Systems. In Tibet there aremany systems of Buddhist teachings like Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya,Jonang, Bodong and others. All these are Buddhist teachings andthey all have wonderful methods of accumulation of merits,purification of obstructions, meditation on deities and recitationof mantras. Through these practices one can achieve liberation.Therefore these are a hundred thousand million times better thanChristianity, Islam and other non-Buddhist teachings. However,there is no system like that of Tsongkhapa's, which is complete,unmistaken, profound and fast.

Although each of the Tibetan philosophical schools feel and assertthat their own philosophy is that of Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti andthus the philosophy of Prasangika, but, because of its very subtletythe followers could not realise the main intention of theirpreceding learned scholar practitioners and have thus erred. Mostof them have become like the philosophy of Hvashang Mahayana. Bybecoming so one will fall into nihilism and will become the causefor hell. Therefore, in Tibet, except Tsongkhapa's philosophy, allothers are mistaken. As such I can affirm that at present on thisearth and be-neath the sky it is only the refined gold, likeManjushri Tsongkhapa's system which is alone totally faultless inevery aspect, be it the philosophical view, the meditation or theconduct. It is complete, profound and extensive and if one has theknowledge and the ability to practice this teaching properly thenone will be able to attain Buddha-hood within twelve human years oreven in three years and three fortnights. This can be sustainedthrough thousands of reasonings and references. The core of theteaching is the path to enlightenment alone. While this wonderfulphilosophy is existent many unfortunately adhere strongly toinferior teachings. Many such people are there in Tibet as well,which is a clear indication of lack of merit. The establishment ofTsongkhapa's teaching, the core of the Buddha's teachings, in yourcountry is such a rare priviledge that even tens and hundreds ofmillions of merits accumulated by Lord Indra and Brahma cannot equaleven a portion of this merit. This is really fortunate.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

"All memories and thoughts are the union of emptiness and knowing, the Mind.Without attachment, self-liberating, like a snake in a knot.Through the qualities of meditating in that way,Mental obscurations are purified and the dharmakaya is attained."

I think they're different letters. I would have to look at the originals... but I can't be arsed.

One more quote from one of pabongkha's letters, included in Dhongthog Rinpoche's book, "A timely tongue of flame."

"Presently, aside from Manjughosha Tsongkhapa's view; the views of all Sa.skya.pa , bKa'.rgyud and rNying.mas are erroneous. What need to mention the consequentialist madhyamaka view, without even an autonomist [madhyamaka] or mind only view, [they] meditate a strictly annihilationist view similar with non-Buddhist extremists [mu.stegs.pa ] and Hashang Mahaayaana. If an annihilationist view is held, a result apart from going to Avici hell is not warranted. Also by not recognizing subtle sinking, meditation will be faulty...because liberation and the non-erroneous path of omniscience will not exist for them; for such as they, although saadhana is practiced for a thousand years, realization will not arise; similar with wishing for butter having churned water, the essence does not exist". [T.G Dhongthog Rinpoche "Dus.kyi.me.lce, Timely Tongue of Flame", pp. 117-118, Delhi: 1979]